Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors say Albany stop-work orders spawned court injunction; council limits comment because case is pending
Summary
Residents described two years of stop-work orders and city inspections connected to a North Albany lot; a Benton County judge granted a preliminary injunction preventing enforcement of the stop-work order, and city staff said the city is a defendant in ongoing litigation so council could not discuss the case.
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Several North Albany residents and a property owner told the council during public comment on July 9 that city stop-work orders and enforcement actions had stalled construction and amounted to harassment, and they said a Benton County judge had issued a preliminary injunction preventing enforcement of the city's stop-work order on the property.
Tom Courter (phonetic in transcript) told the council that a neighbor, Wynn Eaton, has tried to build a single-family house for two years but faced repeated stop-work orders, drone surveillance and what commenters called intrusive inspections. Courter said Judge Matthew Donahue in Benton County granted a preliminary injunction at a hearing this week that prevents the City of Albany from enforcing the stop-work order on the property while the case proceeds toward a final hearing in September.
Other neighbors, including Ron Close and Dennis Holbert, described seeing city staff on adjacent property and said Benton County officials had been more cooperative than city inspectors during permitting and drainage reviews. A representative of the neighborhood urged the city to resolve the matter outside court and avoid further legal costs.
When councilors and city staff were asked to respond, Mayor Johnson said the matter is active litigation and the city is a named defendant; the city therefore declined to comment further because of the pending court case.
The comments at the council meeting were part of the public-comment period; no council action or vote was taken on the issue at the meeting. The speaker accounts said a final court hearing is scheduled in September and urged the city to consider settlement to avoid additional legal expense.

